References

• Baskerville, R. L., & Myers, M. D. (2002). Information systems as a reference discipline. MIS Quarterly, 26(1), 1–14. doi: 10.2307/4132338
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burton, J., & van den Broek, D. (2009). Accountable and countable: Information management systems and the bureaucratization of social work. British Journal of Social Work, 39(7), 1326–1342. doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcn027
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carrilio, T. E. (2008). Accountability, evidence, and the use of information systems in social service programs. Journal of Social Work, 8(2), 135–148. doi: 10.1177/1468017307088495
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Haes, S., & Van Grembergen, W. (2009). An exploratory study into IT governance implementations and its impact on business/IT alignment. Information Systems Management, 26(2), 123–137. doi: 10.1080/10580530902794786
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fitzgerald, B., Russo, N., & Stolterman, E. (2002). Information systems development: Methods in action. Berkshire: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Gillingham, P. (2011). Computer-based information systems and human service organisations: Emerging problems and future possibilities. Australian Social Work, 64(3), 299–312. doi: 10.1080/0312407X.2010.524705
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gillingham, P. (2013). The development of electronic information systems for the future: Practitioners, ‘embodied structures’ and ‘technologies-in-practice’. British Journal of Social Work, 43(3), 430–445. doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcr202
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gillingham, P. (2015). Electronic information systems in human service organisations: The what, who, why and how of information. British Journal of Social Work, 45(5), 1598–1613. doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcu030
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gillingham, P. (2017). Decision-making about the adoption of information technology in social welfare agencies: Some key considerations. European Journal of Social Work, 16, 1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Goldkuhl, G. (2016). E-government design research: Towards the policy-ingrained IT artifact. Government Information Quarterly, 33, 444–452. doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2016.05.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grönlund, Å. (Ed.). (2001). Electronic government: Design, applications and management: Design, applications and management. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
   Google Scholar
• Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Heeks, R. (2005). Implementing and managing eGovernment: An international text. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Hirschheim, R., & Klein, H. (2012). A glorious and not-so-short history of the information systems field. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13(4), 188–235. doi: 10.17705/1jais.00294
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huuskonen, S., & Vakkari, P. (2015). Selective clients’ trajectories in case files: Filtering out information in the recording process in child protection. British Journal of Social Work, 45(3), 792–808. doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bct160
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ince, D. (2010). The Re-development of a problem system ( Technical Report No 2010/4). Milton Keynes: Department of Computing.
   Google Scholar
• Ince, D., & Griffiths, A. (2011). A chronicling system for children's social work: Learning from the ICS failure. British Journal of Social Work, 41(8), 1497–1513. doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcr016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, S., & Hughes, J. (2001). Understanding IS evaluation as a complex social process: A case study of a UK local authority. European Journal of Information Systems, 10(4), 189–203. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000405
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lagsten, J. (2007). Utvärdering av Procapita som verktyg för att handlägga socialtjänstärenden [Evaluation of Procapita as a tool for case handling]. Evaluation report for the municipality, 1–39.
   Google Scholar
• Lagsten, J. (2011). Evaluating information systems according to stakeholders: A pragmatic perspective and method. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation, 14(1), 73–88.
   Google Scholar
• Lagsten, J., & Goldkuhl, G. (2008). Interpretive is evaluation: Results and uses. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation, 11(2), 97–108.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, A. S., Thomas, M., & Baskerville, R. L. (2015). Going back to basics in design science: From the information technology artifact to the information systems artifact. Information Systems Journal, 25(1), 5–21. doi: 10.1111/isj.12054
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ley, T., & Seelmeyer, U. (2008). Professionalism and information technology: Positioning and mediation. Social Work and Society, 6(2), 338–351.
   Google Scholar
• Mumford, E. (2006). The story of socio-technical design: Reflections on its successes, failures and potential. Information Systems Journal, 16(4), 317–342. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2575.2006.00221.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NASW National Association of Social Workers. (2005). Standards for technology and social work practice. Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen, J. (1995). 10 Usability heuristics for user interface design. Retrieved from https://www.nngroup.com/articles/ten-usability-heuristics/
   Google Scholar
• Oates, B. J. (2005). Researching information systems and computing. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Orlikowski, W. J., & Iacono, C. S. (2001). Research commentary: Desperately seeking the “IT” in IT research – A call to theorizing the IT artifact. Information Systems Research, 12(2), 121–134. doi: 10.1287/isre.12.2.121.9700
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker-Oliver, D., & Demiris, G. (2006). Social work informatics: A new specialty. Social Work, 51(2), 127–134. doi: 10.1093/sw/51.2.127
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parrott, L., & Madoc-Jones, I. (2008). Reclaiming information and communication technologies for empowering social work practice. Journal of Social Work, 8(8), 181–197. doi: 10.1177/1468017307084739
   Google Scholar
• Parton, N. (2008). Changes in the form of knowledge in social work: From the ‘social’ to the ‘informational’. British Journal of Social Work, 38(2), 253–269. doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcl337
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Persson, A., & Goldkuhl, G. (2010). Government value paradigms – Bureaucracy, new public management, and e-government. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 27(4), 45–62.
   Google Scholar
• Pithouse, A., Hall, C., Peckover, S., & White, S. (2009). A tale of two CAFs: The impact of the electronic common assessment framework. British Journal of Social Work, 39(4), 599–612. doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcp020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rafferty, J. (1997). Shifting paradigms of information technology in social work education and practice. British Journal of Social Work, 27(6), 959–969. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjsw.a011288
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rafferty, J., & Steyaert, J. (2009). Social work in the digital age. British Journal of Social Work, 39, 589–598. doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcp046
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Räsänen, J.-M. (2015). Emergency social workers navigating between computer and client. British Journal of Social Work, 45(7), 2106–2123. doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcu031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SALAR Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions. (2009). Kommunernas IT-infrastruktur och plattformar 2009 – Aktionsprogrammet för kommunal IT-samverkan i vård och omsorg [The municipalities’ IT infrastructure and platforms 2009 – Action program for municipal IT-collaboration in health care]. Stockholm: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Sapey, B. (1997). Social work tomorrow: Towards a critical understanding of technology in social work. British Journal of Social Work, 27(6), 803–814. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjsw.a011280
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw, I., Bell, M., Sinclair, I., Sloper, P., Mitchell, W., Dyson, P., … Rafferty, J. (2009). An exemplary scheme? An evaluation of the integrated children's system. British Journal of Social Work, 39(4), 613–626. doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcp040
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Symons, V., & Walsham, G. (1988). The evaluation of information systems: A critique. Journal of Applied Systems Analysis, 15, 119–132.
   Google Scholar
• Topi, H., Valacich, J., Wright, R., Kaiser, K., Nunamaker, J., Sipior, J., & de Vreede, G.-J. (2010). IS 2010: Curriculum guidelines for undergraduate degree programs in information systems. Communications of the AIS, 26(18), 359–428.
   Google Scholar
• Tregeagle, S., & Darcy, M. (2008). Child welfare and information and communication technology: Today's challenge. British Journal of Social Work, 38(8), 1481–1498. doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcm048
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walsham, G. (1999). Interpretive evaluation design for information systems. In L. Willcocks & S. Lester (Eds.), Beyond the IT productivity paradox (pp. 183–215). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Wastell, D., Peckover, S., White, S., Broadhurst, K., Hall, C., & Pithouse, A. (2011). Social work in the laboratory: Using microworlds for practice research. British Journal of Social Work, 41(4), 744–760. doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcr014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weill, P. (2004). Don’t just lead, govern: How top-performing firms govern IT. MIS Quarterly Executive, 8(1), 1–17.
   Google Scholar